An institution of higher education may not discriminate against or penalize in any manner, especially with regard to employment or academic support, a faculty member or student based on the faculty member’s or student’s conduct of research relating to the theory of intelligent design or other alternate theories of the origination and development of organisms.

State Rep. Bill Zedler, R-Arlington, is leaving no issue uncovered this session. Zedler, 69, has filed bills ranging from requiring exotic dancers in the state to obtain and display licenses while performing to protecting professors who conduct research on the theory of intelligent design from discrimination from their employers.

Truly a great man! Let’s read on:

Zedler first gained notoriety for leading a grassroots blockade against a Hooters restaurant set to open near his neighborhood in Arlington and was subsequently elected to the Texas House in 2003.

That’s what it takes to get ahead in Texas politics. We continue:

Now, he’s extending that moral battle to include any “sexually oriented business”, including adult video stores and strip clubs, in his recently filed bill that would require employees to obtain and display a license that includes their real name while working “to reduce risks to the public… and to prevent sex trafficking.”

At last, someone is paying attention to the really important problems in society. We’ll skip several paragraphs about the carnal evils with which he’s groping, because it might offend our delicate readers. Instead, we’ll focus only on the news about his bill to protect creationist professors:

Zedler said the bill was prompted by the documentary “Expelled,” which contends the theory of intelligent design hasn’t been disproved.

Yet another creationist influenced by Expelled! And he’s got a good point — intelligent design hasn’t been disproved. No one has disproved The Time Cube either. Why doesn’t Zedler do something to encourage research about that? Here’s more:

Laurence Moran, a professor of biology at the University of Toronto, called the bill a “silly joke” and said firing a biology professor who believes in creationism is not discrimination based on religion, but discrimination based on fact and “stupidity.”

[…]

“A professor of biology that maintains the earth was created 6,000 years ago, that the account in the Book of Genesis is correct, and all species were created at the same time should not expect to keep their job,” he said. “That’s like a geology professor believing the world is flat being protected.”

What does Zedler have to say in response to that? Here you go:

Zedler said comparing intelligent design to the earth being flat is invalid because he hasn’t seen any facts that disprove the existence of God or intelligent design. “I love it when someone comes to me and they want to debate with a weak argument, I love that,” Zedler said.

Zedler is a formidable intellect. We like the way his facile mind jiggles and bounces from Hooters to creationists to strippers. We’ll be keeping an eye on the Z-Man.

In for a penny, in for a pound; religious authority lifts all boundaries against its ‘revealed’ knowledge, which is why you see the religious talking as if what they had to say contributed something more meaningful than a layperson’s opinion at every table of discussion about every subject under the sun… especially if that table is at Hooters.

I also noticed the intelligent design to get the women’s real names listed for the customer’s ‘safety’ so the discussion can continue… presumably in a more private setting… in order, I’m sure, to “promote critical thinking”… oops!… I mean ” to reduce risks to the public.”

Only in religion do we find that up really means down and black is really another kind of white to make all the squinting at Oogity Boogity just revealing enough so that it aligns god’s wishes with one’s preferences, biases, and prejudices. Why, it’s almost a clue about the quality of its methods. Mind you, the metaphyisical musings and moral claims made by the religious to muscle their way into all discussions about public policies (like stem cell research, abortion and family planning services, availability and funding for contraceptives, social services, prisons, the Armed Forces, the Chair of the Senate Committee on Science and Technology, and many other similar trivialities) usually go under the moniker of sophisticated theology. Funny how women are so often the ones who then have to pay the additional price. And another clue slides by the wayside.

I had to read Zelder’s come-back three times to get his point. Flat earth has been disproved, ID hasn’t, therefor it is apples to oranges. Gotcha! Nametags haven’t been proven to not help strippers, therefor we should require them just in case. Ugh, with the double-negatives proving a positive.

This could be a classic case of “Be careful what you wish for…” things. Let’s say he pushes to have the ladies of Hooters (or whatever establishment) wear “licenses” of some sort. I’m willing to bet money they will come up with (ahem!)… imaginative… ways to wear said licenses so as to tweak the morals of the good Rep. Zedler.
If they wind up passing this bit of legislation, they need to add a rider that Rep. Zedler will also have to wear a sign license.

Although his bill about ID is more worthy of ridicule on this blog, I can’t get certain images out of my mind that crept in while reading about his stripper licensing bill. So, the bill would require an exotic dancer to display a license while performing, huh? How would she display said license while working? Tattooed on her fanny?

Retiredsciguy, according to a news story in the Ft. Worth Star Telegram, “‘They could wear it around the neck … or on their shoes … or attached to a head band,’ Zedler suggested.” Apparently he’s thinking of something resembling a driver’s license (or many workplace ID badges) in size and shape, that you could put in one of those clear plastic badge holders attached to a lanyard or clip.

“intelligent design hasn’t been disproved.” ID isn’t a defendant in court, it’s a product that should be expected to justify itself. The attempt to shuffle the burden of proof is another hallmark of the Dishonesty Institute.

I want to know how Zedler expects to enforce his licensing requirement. Is he going to require municipalities to hire stripper inspectors to ensure that the young ladies in their communities are properly badged while working? Or will that be an all-volunteer department of stripper inspection (DSI)? And we need to know more about this “training program” he mentions for people who get licenses. Is the state going to conduct training in how to properly work in the adult entertainment industry? Really?

Zedler said comparing intelligent design to the earth being flat is invalid because he hasn’t seen any facts that disprove the existence of God or intelligent design.

Apparently he hasn’t gotten the memo that one doesn’t link God and intelligent design when pushing an academic freedom type bill. As to his logic, I haven’t seen any facts that disprove the existence of leprechauns either, unless one considers last night’s game as contributing evidence.

AFAIK no professor has ever been fired for their “conduct of research relating to the theory of intelligent design,” and none are ever likely to be fired for that reason. Creationists get fired because they teach wrong stuff in class. Or they get fired because they are not winning grants/doing research at all -i.e., they are not bringing sufficient money into their institution. Believe me, no academic is going ot get fired from their professorship because they won a (e.g.) $million Templeton grant.

Well, when I was at the gentlemen’s club, the girl there said her name was Tiffany. Oh, how I was victimized! I’m a victim. I need government to save me from strippers with fake names. Now, if she had a certificate saying that her name was “Bertha Schutzberger”, justice would be served. Save me, Pappy State! We need to the government to tell naked women to wear badges– it’s so much easier to stalk them.

TA said: “I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that if I were to Google “stripper tattoo fanny””…
To all of the Brit, Aussie, New Zealand (BTW, happy to hear Christchurch appears to be recovering nicely from the 2011 earthquake…), South African or Irish readers, by “fanny” we mean “buttocks” or “derriere”, not what you normally think it means.
Just to be clear.

@Gary: Yes, I did mean that the tattoo would be on the derriere, and not on that part of the female anatomy that a Brit might have thought. This is such a wonderful blog! Here I am at 67 years of age, and I learn something new here just about every day. How enlightening!

Besides, I can’t imagine a tattoo on that “other fanny.” Besides being painful beyond belief, it would be illegible. Wouldn’t work for displaying a license.

This blog's RSS feed link:

Search for:

Email Subscription

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Commenting Rules

Creationists should read the rules before posting any comments. See Comment Rules.

Here's how to use the available codes. Note that codes are used in pairs, to turn the effect on and then off again. Please don’t start one of these codes without closing it:

For italics:

<em>text</em>

For bold:

<strong>text</strong>

For strikethrough:

<del>text</del>

For blockquotes:

<blockquote>this will appear both indented and in italics</blockquote>